MARTIN M. LARSEN & JESPER H. ANDERSENPHD QA COORDINATOR & PHD PROJECT MANAGER

CHASE VERSION 2.XMARTIN M. L., JESPER H. A.

CHASE-ING HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES CHASE TOOL VERSION 2.X

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 20142

WHERE DID CHASE COME FROM?› CHASE 1.0 was first developed by

HELCOM

› A parallel to the HELCOM Eutrophication Assessment Tool (HEAT) used to integrate the different parameters used in HELCOM when assessing eutrophication.

› CHASE 1.0 was a spreadsheet model where all numbers were manually entered!

Developed

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

WHAT IS CHASE?›CHASE is a tool for integrating different chemical measurements, biological effects and radionucleide measurements

›It is based on the contamination ratio (CR) between measured value and target value (e.g. EU WFD EQS target).

›The CR’s for individual components are ”averaged”, usually divided by the square root of n

›Different classes of CRs can be used (e.g. the 3 mentioned above) and aggregated into one integrated CR 3

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

CHEMICAL STATUS›CHASE is based on 114 assessment units

›Nested as follows:› Fish safe to eat (concentrations

in fish < EC food limits)› Concentrations at background

levels (concentration in biota < OSPAR or other assessment criteria)

› Healthy Wildlife (Biological effects like intersex/imposex)

4

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

CHASE RESULTS

5

›PCB’s highest %-high CR’s (20%)

›Followed by metals (Pb, Hg)›Nucleudies and DDT/DDE at 9%

›Organotin (8%)›PAH (7%)›Cd (5%)›And a lot of other substances/biological effects at <5%

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

HARMONY – CHASE 2.0› CHASE development

› Further developed for a subarea of the North Sea in the HARMONY project (Denmark, Norway, Germany, Sweden)

› Data from partners collected in database, and calculations automated based on the database

› Software is available from NIVA/JHA

6

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

CHASE (in prep.)…›CHASE classifications for › sediments (panel A), › biota (panel B) and › bio-effects (panel C).  ›Combining sediments, biota and bio-effects into a final integrated classification of chemical status based on a ‘one out, all out’ principle is presented in panel D.

› Andersen, J.H., C. Murray, M.M. Larsen, N. Green, T. Høgåsen, K. Gustavson, E. Boalt, G. Garnaga, M. Haarich, J. Manio, J. Strand & S. Korpinen (in prep.): A tool for integrated assessment of chemical status.

7

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

CHASE IN EMODnet 2 MFS›Matrices to include› Seawater vs. EU WFD EQS values?› Biota vs. EU WFD EQS/EU food/OSPAR target values?› Sediment vs. OSPAR/US EPA target values?

›Parameters to include› Metals› PCB’s and organochlorine pesticides› New EU WFD EQS in biota (PFOS, PAHs etc)

8

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

OPEN SEA›Station› 80x80km grid› 62 assessment units

9

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

COASTAL›Coastal stations

› 20x20km grid › 189 AUs

10

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

COASTAL ZOOM

11

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

SUGGESTED FIRST STEP (2014)›Based on data-extracts of biota and sediment›Test region in the southern-North Sea or Kattegat

›Setup CHASE programme to read EMODnet file format

›Perform QA and check data availability for the selected area

›Test different ways to integrate/aggregate data

›Grid size and forms – lessons learned in Harmony

›Preferred reporting format: EMODnet report?, AU scientific report?, scientific paper?

12

CHASEMARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A.

19. JUNE 2014

SUGGESTED SECOND STEP (2015)›Test CHASE 2.x with larger areas

›Discuss prefered parameters and target values› Region based or general target values?› Include local target values?› Normalisation procedures for water, biota and sediment?

›Run CHASE 2.x for North Sea area› Discuss how results should be disseminated› Discuss other sea areas for CHASE

13